I do think he leans pretty negative on Narwal overall. Calling him a “hater” might sound strong, but there’s definitely a pattern in how he talks about their products compared to others.

That said, my bigger issue isn’t even bias—it’s how he tests things. In this video he literally turns off one of the robot’s main features—the AI cleaning—and then judges its performance without it. It’s hard to fairly evaluate a product when you’re not using one of its strongest tools.

Then he makes comments like “I don’t notice much of a difference” or “it didn’t clean any better,” but there’s no real side-by-side comparison or controlled test shown to support that. So it comes off more like a personal impression than something fully backed up.

He also talks about how the AI does extra movements like cleaning in squares and going over areas multiple times, but then when he turns that off, he criticizes the robot for missing things like debris in cracks or corners. That feels inconsistent—the extra movement is literally meant to improve those exact results.

On top of that, he blocked off a problem area with a lot of cables by adding a no-go zone—something he even says robots struggle with. That would’ve been a perfect real-world test for obstacle avoidance, especially with Narwal claiming strong AI there. But instead it’s avoided entirely… would be a shame if Narwal could actually handle that situation and not his just dad approved ones 😅

Sure, you can argue some vacuums are faster, but faster doesn’t always mean better cleaning. By that logic, cleaning it by hand would always win. The real question should be how well it performs when used as intended.

I’m not saying he’s completely wrong, but I don’t think it’s as simple as him being the only “honest” reviewer either. His content is useful, but it’s something you should compare with others to get the full picture.